European Journal of Science and Theology,
December 2013, Vol.9, No.6, 211-219
_______________________________________________________________________
ON A POSSIBLE ABBATIAL CROSIER FROM BIZERE
MONASTERY (FRUMUŞENI, ARAD COUNTY)
Adrian Andrei Rusu*
Institute of Archaeology and History of Art, 12-14 M. Kogălniceanu St.,400084 Cluj-Napoca,
Romania
(Received 12 September 2013, revised 13 September 2013)
Abstract
Various artefacts belonging to the former Benedictine abbey in Bizere were recovered
during archaeological excavations in 1981 and from 2001 to 2009. The present study
focuses on one such item, a partially preserved bronze piece in the shape of a dragon‟s or
a snake‟s head, broken off from the body at some point. Several comparable Western
European pieces suggest that the fragment might belong to the upper end of a crosier,
and enable a partial graphic reconstruction. Given that the item was found in an abbey
complex, it was arguably an abbatial crosier. Stylistically Romanesque, it may be dated
sometime before the thirteenth century and thereby be considered the oldest abbatial
crosier known so far from the territory of present-day Romania.
Keywords: religious inventory, Benedictine abbey, medieval bronze, Romanesque art
1. Introduction
The literature on the place or role of the Benedictine abbey in Bizere
(Frumuşeni, Arad County) (ca. twelfth – sixteenth century) has gradually grown
over the last few years [1, 2]. Archaeological digs in 1981, and from 2001 to
2009, have uncovered various artefacts that were once part of the abbey‟s
functional inventory. The present pages aim to analyse one bronze item
(discovered in a fragmentary state) that relates to the abbey and, alongside other
evidence, offers evidence for the level of religious and non-religious material
culture that the monks reached [3]. The fragment was found during the 2002
digging season, in a demolition layer in C4, at a depth of -0.25 m. It is a
fragment from a cast bronze object, 4.1 cm in length and 0.6 cm in thickness,
and weighing 8 g (Figure 1) (Museum Complex Arad (CMA), inv. no. 17.487);
it has the shape of an animal‟s head and neck, with slightly opened mouth.
2. Description
The anatomic details of the head, slightly flattened, are not clearly
rendered. The „forehead‟ is shaped along the main axis, while the eye is marked
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Rusu/European Journal of Science and Theology 9 (2013), 6, 211-219
by a leaf-shaped, oblique contour. The neck soon becomes lozenge-shaped in
section, showing no fewer than nine triangular protuberances on one side, made
through incisions in the mold, whereby the master attempted to render a mane or
stylized scales. Two holes perforate the item, one notably circular in the open
mouth, the other slightly off-centre, to one side of the base of the neck and with
ragged edges, typical for a broken piece. Further breakage at one end indicates
that the fragment once belonged to a larger object, at least partially curved, that
is probably lost forever.
Figure 1. Bronze fragment from Bizere (author‟s photo): (a, b) sides, (c) top view.
.
Even if no dating element has been found in the same context, its obvious
Romanesque traits date the fragment approximately to sometime before the midthirteenth-century.
3. Identification and meaning
As for the identification of this image on the broken tip of a largely lost
object, it seems from the shape of the mouth that the craftsman intended an
imaginary animal, a dragon rather than a snake. Nevertheless, this identification
cannot be considered definitive, precisely since the rest of the body is missing.
The dragon and snake are both among the animals most depicted in medieval art.
The bestiary tradition devoted much space to dragons and their real or imagined
aspects, always linked to the good/evil ambivalence with which they were
endowed. The snake was popular as a decorative motif because of two episodes
[4]. The first is when Moses demonstrated his God-given powers by throwing
his staff at the pharaoh‟s feet, where it changed into a snake. The second refers
to Jesus‟ words: “Be ye therefore as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves”
(Matthew 10.16). As I will show, both interpretations can be recognized in the
handiwork on the positioning supports of the object under analysis. The snake or
dragon was also confused or equated with the Devil, bringing the animal into the
iconography of a long series of male and female saints (among which the best
212
On a possible abbatial crosier from Bizere monastery
known are Philip, George, Hilarion, Pope Leo, Margaret, Martha, Michael,
Sylvester, Theodore of Herakleia and Varlaam). On the other hand, the animals
had an opposite, beneficial role, mainly due to their association with protection
against Evil; here we may mention the two dragons on the relief decoration of
the tympanum above the Romanesque portal of the church in Drăuşeni (Braşov
County).
The main details that suggest the original location or use of the bronze
fragment from Bizere are the two holes. If these were not meant to provide a
simple connection to a larger object, then we might most probably imagine a
lance or spear that once pierced the animal‟s open mouth and exited at the side
of the upper neck. In this latter hypothesis, the dragon would be shown speared
by the Archangel Michael or Saint George: but it might be risky to pronounce
that this was definitively the case. One counter argument is that the decorative
elements of the neck are stronger on one side, suggesting that the object was
meant to be seen from a single point of view and not as a ronde-bosse item.
Leaving the issue of the animal‟s possible identity and looking instead at
the type of artefacts with which it was associated, one can find it in the most
unexpected postures, all of them highly decorative, on objects such as reliquaries
(for example an item dated to the fourteenth or fifteenth century, from the area
of Zadar) [5] aquamanile spouts (an English item from the thirteenth century) [6,
7] and various types of handles (from the fourteenth century, preserved in the
Museum of Cluny). As may be expected, artefacts from lay contexts provide
fewer clues. The few examples mentioned here are also relevant for the time
when they were used. On the other hand, snake (not dragon) heads can be found
in the upper part on a remarkably large and beautiful series of pastoral crosiers.
The symbol, of ancient Jewish origin, derived directly from the basic „tool‟ of
shepherds and goat herders. The shepherd‟s „flock‟ and „crook‟ became symbols
for the guidance of those who had embraced Christianity. As previously
mentioned, Moses‟ staff was the first to change its upper part into a living
creature.
The pastoral crosier (baculus pastoralis, baculus ad volutam, pastorale,
virga, pedum, cambuta) was already in use in churches during the fifth century,
but was officially instituted during the local council of Toledo (633) and became
current in the investiture of church hierarchs from the ninth century. Around the
year 1000, crosiers were used by both regular hierarchs (bishops and
archbishops) and by Benedictine abbots. Such a crosier can be identified through
three components: the curva (Krümme, crosseron, crook – the curved area), the
pedum or virga pastoralis (Schaft, hampe, stave – the staff) and the nodus
(Knauf, noeud, knot – the protuberance that ended the crook) [8]. Important here
are the decorations at the upper end, on the crook and knot. In Romanesque art,
these sectors were enriched with plant and animal motifs, while architectural
elements started to appear from the fourteenth century besides vegetal ornament
[9]. The crosiers were first made of precious materials, precious metals (gilded
silver, bronze) or ivory. In extreme cases, more modest materials (such as wood
or maybe even common bone) were also gilded. The entire lower part, used as a
213
Rusu/European Journal of Science and Theology 9 (2013), 6, 211-219
staff, did not require any jewels or detail, since it was less visible and had a
predominant functional role (supporting the other elements). A survey of early
pastoral crosiers leads to the observation that in most cases, the spiral ended in
the head of a snake or snake-like animal.
The isolated profile of this animal head, remarkably similar to that from
Bizere, can also be found on the tomb of Abbot John of Silos (ca. 1175-† 1198)
from the San Domingo abbey in Castile (Spain) [10] (Figure 2a). Though made
of silver, the „snake‟ head in this case lacks other decoration on the inner side of
the curve in the tip of the spiral. Nevertheless, the elegance of its „lips‟ and the
broken „forehead‟ and neck of the animal are similar. We may also add the
abbot‟s crosier end from Airvault (preserved in Poitiers, France) [4], an item
judged to be Hispanic-Limousin in style, and a twelfth-century crosier
discovered in the tomb of Jean de Chanlay († 1291), Bishop of Mans. Almost
identical and dated to the same century, though gilded, is another French crosier
(The Louvre) (Figure 2b). We should also mention a fragment broken from a
crosier dated to the first half of the twelfth century, discovered at the end of the
nineteenth century in the cathedral of Châlons-en-Champagne (Figure 2c) [11].
The fragment, also of gilded bronze, shows a distinct item in the animal‟s mouth
in shape of a thorn or claw, but considered to have been intended to depict the
animal‟s tongue (though this should have been forked); the element might have
also been the tip of a lance that had pierced the beast‟s head.
Figure 2. (a) Crosier once owned by Abbot John of Silos (ca. 1175-† 1198), from the
San Domingo monastery in Castile; (b) Crosier once owned by Jean de Chanlay (†
1291), Bishop of Mans (Louvre, author‟s photo); (c) Detail of the knot of the pastoral
crosier from the cathedral in Châlons-en-Champagne.
There are also some examples from Germany. In Bremen, the tomb of an
anonymous bishop, with the inventory recovered intact and easily dated to
around 1200, also contained the entire head of a crosier, with a similar ending
(Figure 3a). A fragmentary abbey crosier, with a snake‟s head but richer
collateral decorative elements, was found in the cemetery of Saint Egidius
Monastery in Braunschweig and dated to between the mid-twelfth and midthirteenth century [12]. We may end this survey of comparable pieces with
214
On a possible abbatial crosier from Bizere monastery
another crosier, made in the same style that can be seen in the Bargello Museum
in Florence (Figure 3b). It seems that in all these cases, metal was employed for
the required decorations.
Figure 3. (a) Pastoral crosier from Bremen [12], (b) Pastoral crosier from Florence
(author‟s photo).
Ivory was also used for the upper end of crosiers. An abbey crosier with
animal head and decorative links in the neck area was excavated from the
cemetery of Altenburg monastery (Austria) [13]. A similar item might have been
the model for an image depicting bishop Ermacora, associated to Saint Mark, on
the wall of the crypt inside the basilica in Aquileia (around 1180) [14].
Nevertheless, through a rigorous „reading‟, one might identify the animal as a
dragon as well.
The negative image of the snake/dragon did not go unrepresented either,
especially when crosiers received additional elements. An item from Cluny
museum includes another snake head, pierced by the lance of an archangel who
carries a round shield. The idea is also found on another crosier created in the
enamel style typical to Limoges, preserved in the Louvre. In the case of a third
crosier head from the twelfth century, made of ivory, from Metten (Germany),
the rendering of the snake‟s head and neck is also remarkably similar [4, p. 161].
Here the association has been made with an Agnus Dei, as in the case of another
item from thirteenth-century Italy.
We must look this far afield for pieces comparable to the fragment from
Bizere because, unfortunately, there are too few from the Kingdom of Hungary
(including Transylvania), and these are anyway later than the object under
discussion. One of the closest depictions in bas-relief art can be found in
Hungary, on the abbot‟s seal from Rabbit Island in Buda (end of C13) [15]. In
the museum of Eger I have identified a clumsily executed crosier crook of ivory
or bone, never published, that also includes a reptile/dragon head. Though
undated, it might be attributed to the Romanesque. On the other hand, early
iconographic sources have not been preserved. The earliest examples date from
the C14; one of the oldest representations is on a blank funerary slab from
Oradea [16]. Numerous depictions have been preserved from the C15, but these
215
Rusu/European Journal of Science and Theology 9 (2013), 6, 211-219
contain shapes not very similar to the piece analysed here. This suggests that
such ceremonial items were made according to their era‟s „fashion‟, just like
everything in Europe. I will mention only one find from Transylvania: a 1427
inventory of the Benedictines in Cluj-Mănăştur includes a crosier (bacculus
pastoralis) of gilded wood, which included a depiction of the Virgin with Christ
child in the crook [17, 18].
From the series of Western European comparisons, one may already infer
that several figurative combinations were employed in the making of crosiers.
The snake head was connected to an Agnus Dei (the Louvre), a Limoges crosier
contains the Coronation of the Virgin (the Louvre) and another, produced in the
same workshops, only has stylized decorative motifs (Nieul-sur-l‟Autise,
Vendée – the Louvre). The range is far from exhausted. The snake is at the knot
of the crosier, while in its body‟s arches or spirals in the crook we find further
decorative motifs (other animals or religious scenes). Therefore, the Western
European examples do not allow us to establish with certainty which elements
were used in Bizere to complete the inner part of the crosier. Still, the hole on
the side of the neck indicates without a doubt that this abbot‟s crosier was not of
simple design.
4. Final considerations
The fragment discussed here has been given not only a possible function,
as part of a crosier, but also a partial graphic reconstruction (Figure 4). Since it
was discovered among the ruins of the abbey, it may be the oldest abbot‟s
crosier discovered so far on the territory of Romania. Nevertheless, we cannot
decide whether it was a local product or an artefact made on site, in the
monastery, by the knowledge accumulated by the monks. There are arguments
both for and against local production.
Monastic technology was a never-ending process. Rare written sources
must always be combined with valid archaeological data, which are also
available in the case of Transylvania – although it is true that they represent later
periods (between the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries) and until now, were
never associated with a Benedictine abbey. The Cistercians from Cârţa are
known to have produced glass, the Dominicans from Vinţu de Jos practiced
alchemy and in other places bone was worked (Târgu Mureş), and stove tiles
produced and finished (at least in Sighişoara and Târgu Mureş, but probably also
in other urban monasteries). As for gold articles and toreutics, the Franciscans
from Teiuş and Târgu Mureş are known to have used small crucibles for
precious metals, and the Dominicans from Vinţu left half a mould for casting
buttons.
In the case of Bizere, the monks‟ technical skills could already be seen in
the handling of drinking water (through the tower-fountain [19]) and other
water-related techniques (communicating water adducts, metal pipes for a
lavabo in the south-western corner of the cloister courtyard and the nearby
kitchen, for the garden, docks and dams). Stone-carving workshops and
216
On a possible abbatial crosier from Bizere monastery
workshops for modelling and firing bricks were also found in the abbey. The
first stoves were built of figurative tiles pressed in a few basic moulds,
individually modelled and glazed [20].
The monks were highly skilled in acquiring raw materials. At least in
obtaining building stone, they most probably employed the quarries downstream
on the Mureş river for white limestone Roman spolia, but also brought in rare
stones from around the Mediterranean for the mosaics („imperial‟ red porphyry
and a green porphyry named „Lacedaemonian‟). They either bartered with
salt or bought goods with the money obtained from selling it [21].
Figure 4. (a-c) Hypothetical reconstruction of the abbot‟s crosier from Bizere.
Information about sources for basic metals is very scanty, especially for
the early chronology of Bizere, but still wealthy by comparison with other areas.
Traces of primitive mining were found, though we cannot establish much more
than that they date from the medieval period. The closest mines were discovered
along the Mureş (Milova) or to the north of that river (Arăneag, Cladova, and
217
Rusu/European Journal of Science and Theology 9 (2013), 6, 211-219
Dud); these mainly contained copper but also silver and iron [22, 23]. Much
later, at the close of the Middle Ages, the domain of Şiria was recorded as
providing minerals, but as usual only precious metals were mentioned: Păuliş in
1394 [Magyar Országos Levéltár (National Hungarian Archives), DL collection,
7806], Şiria in 1464 [24].
Besides the traces of mining in the surrounding region, excavations at the
monastery yielded a significant number of lead fragments: bar fragments (20032004) and a piece of lead shaped as a plate (2009). The lead could also be used
independently, for cramps, for fixing stone, as leading for glass or for water
pipes, but could also be smelted for bronze, in which case it is the only
uncombined but useful stable metal found on-site. We know that lead rarely
made up even as much as 5% in the mixtures of bronze, in comparison to 5575% copper and 20-30% pewter. It is essential to mention here that lead is a very
stable metal, which explains its chances of surviving long periods in the soil.
Other, indirect evidence indicates similar activity on the abbey site. A
forge left traces of lumps and slag (2004, 2008) [CMA, inv. no. 17.115; 17.139].
„Cold process‟ metalwork, through the hammering of soft metals or other
suitable metal, is indicated not only by the repaired fragments of brass vessels,
with patches and rivets (2004) [CMA, inv. no. 17.166], but also by a small anvil
(2008) [CMA, inv. no. 17486].
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority
for Scientific Research, CNCS – UEFISCDI, project number PN-II-RU-TE2012-3-0477.
References
[1] I. Burnichioiu and A.A. Rusu, Transylvanian Review, 20(2) (2011) 3-13.
[2] A.A. Rusu and I. Burnichioiu (eds.), Mănăstirea Bizere, vol. 1, Mega, ClujNapoca, 2011.
[3] A.A. Rusu, Annales Universitatis Apulensis. Series Historica, 17 (2013) 2.
[4] L. Charbonneau-Lassay, The Bestiary of Christ, Parabola, New York, 1991, 775776.
[5] ***, Religious Art in the Archidiocese of Zadar 4th-18th Centuries, Muzejskogalerijski Center, Zagreb, 1990, 92.
[6] F.G. Sovage, A Concise History of Bronzes, Thames & Hudson, London, 1968, 93.
[7] R.J. Magnusson, Water Technology in the Middle Ages, The Johns Hopkins
University Press, London, 2001, 112.
[8] ***, Kirchengeräte, Kreuze und Reliquiare der christlichen Kirchen. Objects
liturgiques, croix et reliquaires des eglises chretiennes. Ecclesiastical utensils,
crosses and reliquaries of the christian churches, 3rd edn., K.G Saur, München,
1992, 118-120.
[9] ***, Bildwörterbuch der Kleidung und Rüstung. Vom Alten Orient bis zum
ausgehenden Mittelalter, H. Kühnel (hg.), K.G Saur, Stuttgart, 1992, 32-33.
218
On a possible abbatial crosier from Bizere monastery
[10] M.-M. Gautier, Catalogue international. L’oeuvre de Limoges, C.N.R.S., Paris,
1987, no. 139, 460.
[11] ***, La France romane au temps des prèmiere Capétiens (987-1152), Musée du
Louvre, Paris, 2005, 122.
[12] A. Lungerhausen, Buntmetallfunde und handwerksrelikte des Mittelalters und der
frühen Neuzeit aus archäologischen Untersuchungen in Braunschweig, Marie
Leidorf, Rahden, 2004, 73, 293, no. 288, Taf. 10.
[13] ***, Fundort Kloster. Archäologie im Klösterreich, Bundesdenkmalamt, Wien,
2000, 140.
[14] *** Venedig. Die goldenen Jarhunderte, G. Romanelli (hg.), H.F. Ullmann Verlag,
Berlin, 2011, 34.
[15] L. Némethy, Turul, 5 (1887) 28-31.
[16] V. Bunyitay, A váradi püspökség története alapításától a jelenkorig, vol. III,
Franklin, Nagyvárad, 1883, tab. VIII.
[17] L. Erdélyi László, P. Sörös (eds.), A pannonhalmi Szént Benedek-rend története,
XII/B, Stephaneum, Budapest, 1916, 82-83.
[18] Z. Jakó, A kolozsmonostori konvent jegyzőkönyvei (1289-1556), vol. I, Akadémiai
Kiadó, Budapest, 1990, 193-194.
[19] A.A. Rusu, Turnul cu fântână, in A.A. Rusu & I. Burnichioiu (eds.), Mănăstirea
Bizere, vol. I, Mega, Cluj-Napoca, 2011, 49-58.
[20] A.A. Rusu and G. P. Hurezan, Biserici medievale din judeţul Arad, Complexul
Muzeal Arad, Arad, 2000, 168.
[21] I. Burnichioiu, Privilegii, posesiuni, venituri, in A.A. Rusu & I. Burnichioiu (eds.),
Mănăstirea Bizere, Mega, vol. I, Cluj-Napoca, 2011, 125-126.
[22] V. Boroneanţ, G. P. Hurezan and P. Hügel, Analele Banatului, 6 (1998) 381-389.
[23] V. Boroneanţ, Arheologia peşterilor şi minelor din România, CIMEC, Bucharest,
2000, 118-119.
[24] ***, Documenta ad historiam familae Báthori de Ecsed spectantia. I. Diplomata
1393-1540, P. Németh (szerk.), Nyíregyháza, 2011, 94.
219